That is true. I think the tack of increasing fuel prices has the opposite effect: it hastens the adoption of diesel (and alternative fuels) up to and including %'s of the fleet.
So if we were to project ahead (wave the magic wand) and say the passenger vehicle fleet (235.4M registered vehicles) are say 25% unleaded regular,25%diesel, 25% ethanol 25% bio diesel that would have 75% less demand for (foreign)unleaded regular. What would the SWAG be that does to the price of unleaded regular? Also if we currently import 50-60% foreign oil would that lessen or increase the foreign oil demand?
The combination between durability, fuel economy, and price gives me no other choice but diesel. Too bad we do not have many choices in this part of the world
I think we need to put the durability question into context. So for example on the VW TDI's the actual design life is 20,000 hours or so. So for example if you figure on an average of 50 mph that puts it in the neighborhood of 1,000,000 miles. Of course the design is such that there are other "suicide" points. So if you keep the suicide points at reasonable arms length, hopefully that increases the likelihood of achieving that goal. Honda Civics, Accords and Toyota Corollas and Camrys routinely see 250,000 miles and above. So as a bear minimum a diesel should easily do that.
So for example if you told me 40 years ago that I could go 25,000 miles between OCI's, I would have probably thought you nuts!!
Please do not forget that diesels are true multi-fuel engines. Biodiesel has 98% of the energy content of dino diesel so there is generally no loss in performance or fuel economy. The sources of biodiesel range from plant oils to animal fat/tallow. It is a completely carbon neutral resource and is essentially renewable.
At present, I am paying about 16 cents less per gallon for diesel fuel than for regular unleaded gas. At another station down the road, the difference is 10 cents per gallon, again in favor of diesel fuel. I am starting to see more stations that sell diesel sell it for less than regular unleaded gasoline.
You hint at the advantage of diesel and I HAVE to agree with you, especially after doing the math. So using the VW Jetta gasser (EPA highway) 31 mpg vs TDI 49 mpg here goes:
Corner store 3.29 unleaded regular/3.19 #2 diesel
price per mile
3.29/31= .106129 cents per mile 3.19/49= .065102 cents per mile
.041027 cents MORE per mile
So diesel per mile costs .3865767% LESS per mile!!!
Or the other way to say it is unleaded regular costs 63% MORE than diesel !!!
There is also a greater population (than diesel) that uses the HIGHER cost PREMIUM unleaded....
Both diesels and hybrids save about 30-40% of fuel - only using different methods. There is no one-size-fits-all vehicle and there never will be. That's the main reason. Your choice is not my choice.
But a huge issue is that presently diesel vehicles are not universally available in this market.
These are the two reasons why hybrids exist and thrive here in this market at this time. 10 yrs from now this will look entirely different most likely.
I would proffer that the reasons are simply two sides of one coin. One is/has been BANNED/vilified, the other promoted/marketed. The usual 50/50 coin flip having diesel systematically (model year to model year) EXCLUDED.
Of course it was casted in stone years ago when the regulators UTTERLY FAILED to do an upgrade path for #2 diesel similar to the now historic leaded regular to unleaded regular.
I of course would find interesting the Prius head to head comparison with one being gasser the other being diesel. Projecting ahead, mindful of the fact there is NO diesel model, a 38% advantage would make this comparo almost a no brainer.
Agreed and it's a shame. We could have been saving 30-40% of our fuel dollars annually for 'x' number of years rather than sending them to the MidEast.
I agree that both forms achieve the improved fuel economy by different means, but with hybrids the method is far more complex and messy.
At the present time, diesel fuel prices are several cents lower on the average (nationwide) than for unleaded regular gasoline. If this gap continues to grow, it is going to become harder to justify paying the extra cost of a hybrid.
The number of diesel models is, unfortunately, limited for now, but I feel that this will change in the next two to three years once ULSD is in place.
I can tell you from the calls I had on my Passat TDI that the demand for diesel cars is very strong. I could have sold a dozen for more than MSRP here in CA. I do not know why VW is not taking advantage of this market. They may have more demand at home and make more money in the EU. US buyers are much more fickled than EU buyers would be my view. VW was having a hard time selling the diesel cars last year in April. This year they are selling all they can get.
Didn't Audi win the Le Mans series race at Sebring with their R10 diesel?! If Audi can compete in the US with a diesel car (and win), then so can anyone else.
If we make stopping global warming the sine qua non of regulation, then we won't be having this argument, because we won't be allowed to drive cars, at all
switching to diesels from gassers may be significant from a short-term pocketbook perspective, but it isn't going to solve the global warming problem (IF we assume it is a problem)
I'm not saying it is or it isn't.
As to "using 30% more to lower emissions by one pound," I am guessing you don't have a family member with asthma. Does this mean that you are opposed to unleaded gas?
Some issues are public health issues, not economic issues. The toxicology of diesel emissions is well documented. It's not like this stuff is a secret. I'm not saying diesel doesn't have a role in our energy future - am just saying that having dirty diesels on the road is not in ANYONE's interest, except the driver who is thrilled that he is saving a few bucks.
Once the technology is there and the cleaner diesel is available, I am sure they will be legal in California.
Frankly, I'm not sure why Mass and New York care, since such a high % of their air pollution does not affect the local population (as it usually blows out to sea, compared to what happens in LA, San Francisco Bay, California's central valley). Maybe folks up in Newfie hired lobbyists to go to Albany and Boston.
Once the technology is there and the cleaner diesel is available, I am sure they will be legal in California.
The technology is available now. MB Blue Tech diesels pass CARB requirements. Diesel creates fewer green house gasses than gas. It's the Nox and PM, but that should be greatly reduced with ULSD.
It will be interesting to see how California deals with the movement that wants acceptance of biodiesel, in light of the regulatory bias against diesel
$16/gallon? I don't care about other people's asthma THAT much!! ;-)
"$16/gallon? I don't care about other people's asthma THAT much!! ;-) "
Yeah I thought that would inject some reality into the discussion.
I think another .50 cents to 1.00 per gal more for unleaded regular as diesel declines by a like amount will turn the current inertia into a tsunami of public support.
Essentially at this juncture, the market has turn so called "econo box type" cars from an at invoice transaction to MSRP for a majority of the popular makes and models. I also was happy for Gagrice as he indicated he got the price he sought for his TDI and had BACK UP buyers with REAL MONEY in case the sight unseen buyer in first position decided NOT!!!
I think on a macro level there might be unintended consequences as China is projected to consume even more oil than the USA. They of course as you can see will consume it at much FASTER rates and at a much cheaper prices. So while we make our population suffer, (by higher costs) the flood gates will be WOT for China!!! It is well known that petro in Euro is at 6/7/8 (US) also it should not surprize anyone that Europe is in a state of arrested decay. Also China's emissions standards dont even come close to Euro and the USA standards, let alone CA's. !!
So for example in IRAN a gal of unleaded regular sells for .42 cents !!!!!!!!
I think on a macro level there might be unintended consequences as China is projected to consume even more oil than the USA. They of course as you can see will consume it at much FASTER rates and at a much cheaper prices. So while we make our population suffer, (by higher costs) the flood gates will be WOT for China!!! It is well known that petro in Euro is at 6/7/8 (US) also it should not surprize anyone that Europe is in a state of arrested decay.
So for example in IRAN a gal of unleaded regular sells for .42 cents !!!!!!!!
China allready own, or is partial owner or has major contracts for oil from every oil producing country except the USA. Of which they almost got a USA company but(fortunately) there was an uproar and that was stopped. They know that they have only started to need fossil fuels and want to secure it in as many ways as possilbe, of which does include building up it's navy. While in the last 10 yrs the USA only build 1 sub while China build 16. Also, the quality is't half as the USA but with their new industrial might they will surely improve on that as well.
In England reg gas goes for $1.98/liter ($7.50/gal). something we still are fortunate for stil paying much less.
In Venesuela they only pay .04/liter (bout .16/gal). And the USA is funding that commie who hates our guts, has done a major deal with China for oil. The USA really needs to get it''s chit together before the chit really hits the fan one day and it surely will.
As to "using 30% more to lower emissions by one pound," I am guessing you don't have a family member with asthma. Does this mean that you are opposed to unleaded gas?
What I am saying is we are reaching the point of diminishing returns. The Holy grail of the environmentalist is zero emissions and zero GHG. It can be done. What most people do not realize is the amount of pollution going from a 1 to 10 on the EPA scale is a very small amount. If you have followed the EPA rating scale you would have noticed about a year ago they recalculated the scale, as many cars were in the top 8-10 rating. So they basically spread out the rating so a vehicle that was a 6 is now a 1 on the new scale. Basically if all the new vehicles were clean enough to not make much difference the EPA would be out of a job.
Going from ULEV to SULEV is almost undetectible. In fact the CA test stations for smog check cannot detect the difference. So the cars rated ULEV & SULEV are currently exempt. I took my Passat TDI into a station as I was curious about the emissions using ULSD. Guess what they have no way of testing a diesel engine at those places. So it is easier to ban them than to upgrade all their equipment. A friend at church worked in one of those places until he got fed up with the CA system. He told me that the tests were completely phoney and just another way to generate revenue. And yes my son in Alaska has asthma and he drives a diesel delivery truck. The only time he is bothered is down here during the spring and summer when the pollen and dust get to him.
How did you become such an emissions geek? (intended as a compliment)
Taken as one.
I was curious why CA would allow big diesel PU trucks and not a much cleaner VW diesel. I found that CA and CARB are controlled not by science but special interest groups. I looked at the EPA site and determined through reading a lot of pages of boring stuff that we were chasing a mighty small amount of pollution over the last 15 years.
I was raised in Los Angeles. I remember when my chest would hurt and I could not breathe due to pollution. That horrible brown haze that hung over us most of the year. We moved to San Diego in 1958 and I did not feel that pain in my chest for several years. The fact that the EPA did a lot to clean up our air is a fact of life for me. I can appreciate making cars burn clean with clean unleaded gas. My question and others have asked the same thing. WHY has it taken 30 or more years to take the sulfur out of diesel fuel. We knew back then that it was bad stuff. Most of the pollution caused by diesel is directly related to sulfur. Much of the NoX is caused by trying to burn the sulfur out of diesel. It has been the special interests in the transportation sector, trucks, ships, heavy equipment & trains that have held us back on cleaning that part of the pollution out of our air. CARB & the EPA have blamed it on diesel cars to keep the environmentalists at bay. In the process we use 30% more oil than is needed to drive the miles we drive in this country. We have dumped 30% more GHG than has been necessary. All so the politicians can claim they are doing something for the environment.
The california system may be messed up but at least they have one.
I live in South Carolina and anything goes here. We obviously don't care about kids with breating problems. 20 year old school busses spew black smoke. Old cars with gas engines are riding around here spewing black smoke worse than my CRD does if I floor it.
Georgia has testing and as soon as you cross the border all the old smoking crap buckets disappear. So while the test may not be perfect, it better than what we have (nothing).
We don't even have vechile inspection anymore. If it rolls drive it no matter the shape. Who cares if there are no breaks, the windshield is cracked, it gets 100miles to a quart of oil, No hood, the suspension is crap, and there is a sticker in the back glass that read, "Aint Skert" or "Redneck". As long as it has working lights and insurance, drive it.
Old cars with gas engines are riding around here spewing black smoke worse than my CRD does if I floor it.
That is the other extreme. I think that a middle of the road sensible approach is what is needed. Your Liberty CRD would not smoke at all if you had good diesel. If you can find a BP station that sells diesel, try a tank full. It is higher cetane and a maximum of 30 PPM sulfur throughout the USA. In CA BP/ARCO only sells ULSD which is less than 15 PPM sulfur. We rarely see any car spewing smoke. If we do 9 times out of 10 it is an out of state or country vehicle. If EPA was doing the job they were given we would not have this disparity between states.
Buses are very expensive with all the new exhaust systems. Many school districts here have quit their bus programs. Or you have to pay for bus service for your children. There is no free bus service any more, that I know of. You are correct that old diesel buses put out a LOT of pollution. It would be better with ULSD, however the engines will need to be modified for the cleaner diesel. This is where all the hassle comes from on converting to ULSD. Many operators do not want to spend the money upgrading their engines for ULSD. Most modern diesel engines were developed on low sulfur diesel, such as your CRD. That is why all the EGR problems with our old crappy diesel.
This is exactly my point. Georgia has emmisions testing. I assume this is mainly because Atlanta is a fairly large city with a lot of cars and a lot of commuters. The program isn't very strict some older cars have trouble passing, if your cut the cat out you are not going to pass. It doesn't have to be a new car to pass but it can't be burning oil. In SC it can be on fire because there is no program. California emmisions controls go a little to far, probably because southern california has so many people and cars, but that is beside the point. Why eliminate diesel all together, surely law makers realize that diesel is more effecient and cleaner than it used to be.
I read all of this stuff about emmission control and enviromnetal concerns in california, and the first time i visited San Diego I expected to see all the people driving honda, and little euorpean mini cars. What a shock I recieved when I was greeted by huge suv's and pickups. I don't know where I was going with that.
My CRD doesn't really smoke. I was just trying to make a point.
Two things are involved. Los Angeles basin all the way to the San Bernardino Mtns get smog at times. Most has been traced back from the harbor at San Pedro/Long Beach. This is a major source of income and the ships burning everything from diesel to bunker oil sit there running while they are waiting to unload and load. There have been moves to give shore power that helps.
Second the head of CARB is a long time hater of diesel cars. I do understand he is softening his stance a bit. The restrictions that should have been dumped onto ships and trucks were instead aimed at cars. That way CARB could claim they are doing something about the pollution.
"I live in South Carolina and anything goes here. We obviously don't care about kids with breating problems. 20 year old school busses spew black smoke. Old cars with gas engines are riding around here spewing black smoke worse than my CRD does if I floor it.
Georgia has testing and as soon as you cross the border all the old smoking crap buckets disappear. So while the test may not be perfect, it better than what we have (nothing).
We don't even have vechile inspection anymore. If it rolls drive it no matter the shape. Who cares if there are no breaks, the windshield is cracked, it gets 100miles to a quart of oil, No hood, the suspension is crap, and there is a sticker in the back glass that read, "Aint Skert" or "Redneck". As long as it has working lights and insurance, drive it."
There are no inspection programs in California either. Vechicles are checked for emissions only.
LA has special problems with SMOG that do not apply to most areas of the country. The LA basin was called "valley of the smokes" by the native populations, because the smoke from campfires stayed in the air. So vehicle emissions tend to stay in the air as well. The San Fernando valley at least often has a strong north wind to blow smog away.
I doubt that you really need the extra CARB requirements in South Carolina. And believe me, you don't want the extra 40 or so cents per gallon (sometimes 50 cents per gallon) required by the CARB "boutique" gas blends.
South Carolina doesn't have tailpipe emissions controls because the entire state is smoking two packs/day, anyway. What's the point of cleaning up the air if half a person's intake is coming THROUGH a lit cigarette?!!!
Try using the curb weight of the hybrid cars and suvs compared to conventional cars and suvs. Multiply the curb weight with the MPG's using accurate real world numbers. This should give you a more interesting argument on which is better. Hands down with regenerative braking systems hybrids do better in the City. But on the highway Diesels are King. Remember include the curb weight of the vehicles. A Ford Escape Hybrid is 3775 lbs. A Lexus 330H Hybrid is 4365 lbs. A Toyota Highlander Hybrid is 4245 lbs and a Jeep Liberty CRD is 4306 lbs. The Ford escape Hybrid with one passenger unloaded will do the Best. But when loaded with say four or five passengers and stuff in the back it will be the Jeep liberty CRD. Remember Real world! And make sure you compare 4x4s with 4x4s not 4x2s. Then take Hybrid and Non-Hybrid models of the same vehicles and do the same thing. Throw in a couple of diesel powered cars like say the VW Jetta diesel and see what happens. Not all types do best in all uses. Be happy you have so many choices. And pick the one that suites you the best. I like the Jeep Liberty CRD. I drive it over 500 miles a week mostly highway with three teenaged children. I can throw the dog in the back and go. If I need something at Lowes or want to tow one of my "toys" somewhere it fits my needs while averaging 26+ MPGs. Remember mostly highway. And City I get 22 to 23 MPGs. So I'm happy.
I also do a lot of Highway driving with my liberty and I love it. I Drove my wifes Impala this weekend (first time behind a gas powered car in about 3 months) and i kept thinking what a qutless terd. I used to think "man this car has good power". I think that a lot of people didn't even know that there was such a think as the liberty diesel. I can't imagine test driving the liberty 3.7 and then liberty CRD and picking the 3.7.
From all I can read and people I talk to the Liberty CRD was a smashing sales success. The dealer in Texas I talked to said they are sold before they get off the truck. If they put the Mercedes 3.2L in the Grand Cherokee it will be on my list. I don't think I will ever buy another new gas vehicle. After owning the VW TDI and my Sprinter conversion van I am sold on diesel.
MSNBC reports: Algae tested to fight warming, grow fuel New York state, two partners will capture carbon dioxide, make biofuel
NEW YORK - How's this for a green idea: Remove carbon dioxide, a gas that many scientists tie to global warming, by having algae turn it into clean fuel?
It's actually more than an idea, and the state of New York along with independent power producer NRG Energy and GreenFuel Technologies will be testing the technology.
In a partnership announced Tuesday, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority is funding the project, which will test GreenFuel’s CO2 recycling technology at NRG's coal-fired power plant in Dunkirk, N.Y.
"This project has the potential to not only benefit the air quality in the surrounding community, but to also continue our progress toward producing clean renewable energy here in New York," NYSERDA President Peter Smith said in a statement.
Around 40 percent of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions come from fossil-fueled power plants.
GreenFuel will use a mini-bioreactor system to assess the technical and economic viability of its technology, which would use algae to consume CO2 emitted by the power plant. The algae could then be converted into biofuel, NRG said.
In a press release, the partners described the process this way: “In the presence of light, the single-celled algae take up CO2 to produce the energy that fuels plant life -- with a general rule of thumb being that two tons of algae remove one ton of CO2. Once the algae are harvested, they can be converted to generate commercially viable byproducts such as ethanol or biodiesel."
The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority will fund the study through the end of the year.
"Our key goals are, and have always been, to provide affordable, reliable and environmentally responsible energy. In that regard, doing our part to advance technological initiatives that may reduce CO2 emissions from our plants is a moral imperative," NRG President David Crane said in the statement.
GreenFuel said it expects its bioreactors will be able to be retrofitted to existing sources with minimal impact on existing generation operations.
NZ firm makes bio-diesel from sewage in world first
12.05.06 By Errol Kiong
A New Zealand company has successfully turned sewage into modern-day gold.
Marlborough-based Aquaflow Bionomic yesterday announced it had produced its first sample of bio-diesel fuel from algae in sewage ponds.
It is believed to be the world's first commercial production of bio-diesel from "wild" algae outside the laboratory - and the company expects to be producing at the rate of at least one million litres of the fuel each year from Blenheim by April.
To date, algae-derived fuel has only been tested under controlled conditions with specially grown algae crops, said spokesman Barrie Leay.
Aquaflow's algae, however, were derived from excess pond discharge from the Marlborough District Council's sewage treatment works. Algae take most chemicals out of sewage, but having too many of them taints the water and produces a foul smell.
Creating fuel from the algae removes the problem while producing useful clean water, said Mr Leay. The clean water can then be used for stock food, irrigation and, if treated properly, for human consumption.
Mr Leay said the process could also benefit dairy farmers and food processors as the algae also thrive in those industries' waste streams.
And unlike some bio-fuel sources which require crops to be specially grown - using more land, fuel, chemicals and fertilisers - the algae already exist extensively.
To get the fuel, the algae are processed into a pulp before lipid oils are extracted to be turned into bio-diesel.
Does biodiesel take more energy to make than it gives back? No. Biodiesel actually has the highest “energy balance” of any transportation fuel. The DOE/USDA lifecycle analysis shows for every unit of fossil energy it takes to make biodiesel, 3.2 units of energy are gained. This takes into account the planting, harvesting, fuel production and fuel transportation to the end user.
Nat'l Biodiesel Board 3337A Emerald Ln. P O Box 104898 Jefferson City, MO 65110-4898 (573) 635-3893 phone (800) 841-5849 (573) 635-7913 fax www.biodiesel.org NEWS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contacts: Jenna Higgins / NBB (573) 635-3893 Gene Hemphill/New Holland (717) 355-1371 May 17, 2006 New Holland Becomes First Equipment Maker to Fully Approve B20 National Biodiesel Board Applauds Company’s Pioneering Move (JEFFERSON CITY, Mo.) – Ed Hegland, a soybean grower in Appleton, Minn., has waited for this news for years. The maker of his tractor, New Holland, has approved the use of 20 percent biodiesel (B20) in all of its equipment using New Holland engines. It is the first Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) to announce full support of B20 in all of the diesel engines that it produces. “I am elated that New Holland has taken this step to show support for biodiesel, a farmer-grown fuel,” Hegland said. “Their customers asked for it, and they listened. I truly hope others will follow suit soon.” The National Biodiesel Board (NBB) applauded New Holland’s decision. “This is what we have been working toward for years; a major equipment manufacturer announcing full support for use of high quality B20 in all the diesel engines that they produce,” said Joe Jobe, CEO of NBB. “Although other OEMs have taken positive steps toward B20, New Holland is the first to specifically say that they approve the use of B20 in all of their engines. This powerful stand for renewable energy is helping lead us toward a safer, less dependent nation.” “Biodiesel is the future,” said Dennis D. Recker, Vice President of New Holland Agricultural Business in North America. “As the availability of fossil fuels becomes a greater problem, we need to look at alternatives. But they must also be cleaner, environmentally friendly alternatives. New Holland is renowned for its innovation and forward-thinking approach, and we are committed to bringing our customers the latest technology and the benefits it brings.” NBB’s close work with New Holland and other OEMs was instrumental to the company’s decision to support B20. During the past several years, NBB and the diesel engine, fuel injection, and vehicle companies have engaged in extensive biodiesel research and testing programs to develop an informed, fact-based position on the use of up to a 20 percent biodiesel blend in diesel applications in the U.S. (http://www.biodiesel.org/buyingbiodiesel/guide/B20_Fleet_Recommendations.pdf). The effort was based on actual fleet experience with B20 in the commercial marketplace. In addition, NBB and all the major vehicle, engine and fuel injection companies are engaged in a research program for new diesel technology. The program tests B20 and lower blends in the advanced diesel engine platforms mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) starting with 2007 model year vehicles. “Our industry’s goal is for B20 approval in all major diesel engines and vehicles, and we are making great strides towards that,” Jobe said. All major OEMs support B5 and lower blends, provided they are made with biodiesel meeting ASTM D 6751. A growing number are recommending the use of BQ-9000 companies. BQ- 9000 is NBB’s biodiesel industry quality program. “While some companies might not fully recommend use of blends higher than B5 yet, we have had virtually no problems with high quality B20—the type that would come from BQ-9000 approved companies. Use of blends higher than B5 will not necessarily void existing warranties,” said Jobe. Earlier this year, DaimlerChrysler broke new ground when it announced approval of the use of B20 in its Dodge Ram pickup trucks for government, military and commercial fleet customers. Use of B20 in fleets is approved effective with the 2007 Model Year. New Holland has a track record of biodiesel support. In 2003, New Holland was the first large farm equipment company to join the Biodiesel Alliance that connects the widespread support base for biodiesel. The Biodiesel Alliance includes agricultural and health groups as well as businesses. New Holland also awarded use of its tractors to the nation’s two top recruiters of the Biodiesel Alliance. Hegland, who also serves as chair of the NBB technical committee, has used various blends of biodiesel in his ’98 tractor since he first brought it to the farm. “This is a leap forward for the biodiesel industry, and the timing couldn’t be better,” he said. “Everyone is talking about energy and how to increase our domestic supply. Biodiesel is one of the best things out there to help us do that.” Biodiesel is a renewable diesel fuel that is made from domestic resources such as soybean oil or other domestic fats and vegetable oils. It can be used in any diesel engine with few or no modifications, and can be blended with petroleum diesel at any level. Biodiesel significantly cuts harmful environmental emissions, promotes greater energy independence and boosts our economy. Today, more than 600 major fleets use biodiesel commercially, and 700 retail filling stations make it available to the public. # # # Additional information about biodiesel is available online at www.biodiesel.org.
Some misc info, not just biased undocumented opinions: ========================================================
(JEFFERSON CITY, Mo.) – Sales of the Jeep® Liberty CRD diesel, which comes pre-filled with 5 percent biodiesel (B5), are about to surpass the 10,000 mark. That’s double the number expected when Chrysler Group first launched the diesel model in early 2005.
Biodiesel is a cleaner burning, renewable alternative fuel that can be made from any fat or vegetable oil, such as soybean oil. The market surplus in soybean oil from one bushel of soybeans makes 1.4 gallons of biodiesel, offering up a lucrative new market for America’s farmers without detracting from the nation’s food supply.
Biodiesel has become America’s fastest growing alternative fuel according to the Department of Energy. More than 600 retail filling stations make biodiesel available to the public, and 1,500 petroleum distributors carry it nationwide. More than 600 major fleets now use biodiesel, including government and military, commercial and school bus fleets.
Biodiesel has become America’s fastest growing alternative fuel according to the Department of Energy.
We use a lot of diesel each year for trucks, trains, buses, ships & heating. Biodiesel is a much simpler solution than ethanol. It can be dumped into the pipeline stream in any mixture. It is so simple to make from so many different sources. It probably scares the big corporations like ADM, as they cannot control it like they can ethanol. Algae seems to be gaining ground from several fronts. Animal rendering is a source. Used cooking oil is probably the widest used product from the single vehicle user to major companies. My favorite Potato Chip maker Kettle Chips has a fleet of VW Beetle TDIs that run on B100 from their own used cooking oil.
I suspect that grassroots entrepreneurs will solve the energy problems, not our worthless government.
This will have to remain a grassroots, local entrprenurial effort demanded by the people because the Big Oil companies sure aren't going to promote it. If you were in charge of such a company and had multi-BILLIONS of dollars invested all over the world in exploration, refining and transportion of dino-fuel and had direct access to or owned the rulers of several ( many?) countries would you be willing to allow the mass development of a local, possibly limitless supply of 'go-juice'.
Actually you might persuade the local, national authorities to hinder development, production, transport of this competing product. OTOH if a far-sighted management of such a company saw the end of readily available dino-fuel in the intermediate term getting in on the ground floor is the strategy to follow.
I think for the next 20 yrs we will still have to buy all our B100 from Willie and others.
I think for the next 20 yrs we will still have to buy all our B100 from Willie and others.
I think Willie's enterprise is grass roots. He is very small potatoes in the energy business. I noticed that Shell has bought a big interest in Iogen, the company that has the best chance at producing ethanol from biomass, such as switchgrass. It will take big investors like the oil companies to build those huge processing plants. The government will only muddle things up by getting involved. If there is money to be made let business get the job done. There is plenty of money for good business venture prospects. What is a better investment than energy?
OTOH if a far-sighted management of such a company saw the end of readily available dino-fuel
I think the oil companies are way ahead of us on such ventures. When BP bought ARCO they got one of the largest manufacturers of solar panels. ARCO was an early investor in that field, that is just now starting to make a little money. The problem has been cheap oil. Remember the shale oil projects that went bust in the 1980s. It could happen again in Canada. Ethanol in Brazil went bust in the 1980s when oil prices came back to earth. Sugar was more valuable than ethanol. The billions of tax dollars we are dumping into ADM pockets as we type, could all go up in vapor. The Ethanol plants are only money makers with very high priced oil and big subsidies. What will happen to biodiesel prices when Exxon turns on the valves to their 8 billion dollar natural gas to diesel venture in Qatar? They claim that Qatar with the world's largest known reserves of natural gas could supply a lot of ultra low sulfur diesel for the next couple hundred years. Could be why we have such a large military presence in Qatar.
I am a big proponent of BD. The problem with getting anything done is DC is the lobby groups and the politicans. Don't forget the politicans. I think most people who don't have there head deeply entrenched in there butts can see that BD is a viable solution for the emediate future. Unlike ethonal and hydrogen, which are expensive and energy intensive to make. Does anyone know the engery balance to enthonal?
The lobby groups can't agree to just push BD they want to push the feed stock. The soy growers what it to be from soy beans and bash anyother method (the National biodeisel board was once the nation soy diesel board if you don't believe me look it up). It is just now that they have started to unite there efforts. Hince the name change at the NBB and publication of other feed stocks on there web page.
The enthonal lobbiests if nothing else have there act together. I mean look at ethonal. E85 is becoming more and more popular even though it costs more and the cars get worst fuel effeciency :confuse:. Why GM has gotten on the E85 kick is beyond me, they haven't done anything progressive ever. They are the reason that people in this contry dislike diesel so much but that is another conversation. If the BD people got there stuff together the way that the ethonal people have BD would be much more popular. There problem is also two fold they are not just pushing BD they also have to convence the public the deisel in general can be environmentaly friendly.
My boss gets never want to ride with me to lunch because he thinks that my jeep is going to smell like a big rig diesel truck. I made him follow me one day and tell me if he could smell any diesel and of course he couldn't, but this is the image problem the the BD folk have to deal with.
this is the image problem the the BD folk have to deal with.
Even the informed here at Edmund's still think that the major users of biodiesel get their fix from the back door of McDonald's. Then keep it in barrels in the garage. There is that contingency and they are driving around with a big smile on their faces and the sweet smell of french fries emanting from their exhaust. It can be done for pennies per gallon with NO tax. If I was not so lazy I would join their ranks.
The first profitable biodiesel venture I know of is in Maui. Pacific Biodiesel started out as a homegrown way to use the 40 tons of wasted oil being dumped into the landfill each month. They are the people that got Willie Nelson involved as they sold him and others in his commune biodiesel. I am going to buy another diesel vehicle. Probably one out of warranty so I don't worry about voiding it, and start using Willie B20 that is available in San Diego. I will get a 100 gallon tank and set up for my Kubota tractor and whatever other vehicles I buy. It may be one of these.
The limited-edition “Willie's Willys” pickup was unveiled yesterday at the 2006 National Biodiesel Conference at the San Diego Convention Center.
What will happen to biodiesel prices when Exxon turns on the valves to their 8 billion dollar natural gas to diesel venture in Qatar? They claim that Qatar with the world's largest known reserves of natural gas could supply a lot of ultra low sulfur diesel for the next couple hundred years. Could be why we have such a large military presence in Qatar.
They know that qatar has lots of natural gas but it's still fossil fuel. The USA would keep any military in any country that sells fossil fuels because as Dubba said, "America is adiccted to oil". However, most countries decline USA directly in thier country. Of which Qatar is a very small country and very small military and needs to feel secure in their accests and will take the political fallout to let the USA military stay there, as they have said on TV.
Comments
So if we were to project ahead (wave the magic wand) and say the passenger vehicle fleet (235.4M registered vehicles) are say 25% unleaded regular,25%diesel, 25% ethanol 25% bio diesel that would have 75% less demand for (foreign)unleaded regular. What would the SWAG be that does to the price of unleaded regular? Also if we currently import 50-60% foreign oil would that lessen or increase the foreign oil demand?
So for example if you told me 40 years ago that I could go 25,000 miles between OCI's, I would have probably thought you nuts!!
Another good reason to own diesel is because for the past six to eight weeks, diesel fuel has been less expensive than gasoline. Go to the link below.
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/gdu/gasdiesel.asp
At present, I am paying about 16 cents less per gallon for diesel fuel than for regular unleaded gas. At another station down the road, the difference is 10 cents per gallon, again in favor of diesel fuel. I am starting to see more stations that sell diesel sell it for less than regular unleaded gasoline.
So again I ask, why buy a hybrid?
Corner store 3.29 unleaded regular/3.19 #2 diesel
price per mile
3.29/31= .106129 cents per mile
3.19/49= .065102 cents per mile
.041027 cents MORE per mile
So diesel per mile costs .3865767% LESS per mile!!!
Or the other way to say it is unleaded regular costs 63% MORE than diesel !!!
There is also a greater population (than diesel) that uses the HIGHER cost PREMIUM unleaded....
But a huge issue is that presently diesel vehicles are not universally available in this market.
These are the two reasons why hybrids exist and thrive here in this market at this time. 10 yrs from now this will look entirely different most likely.
Of course it was casted in stone years ago when the regulators UTTERLY FAILED to do an upgrade path for #2 diesel similar to the now historic leaded regular to unleaded regular.
I of course would find interesting the Prius head to head comparison with one being gasser the other being diesel. Projecting ahead, mindful of the fact there is NO diesel model, a 38% advantage would make this comparo almost a no brainer.
At the present time, diesel fuel prices are several cents lower on the average (nationwide) than for unleaded regular gasoline. If this gap continues to grow, it is going to become harder to justify paying the extra cost of a hybrid.
The number of diesel models is, unfortunately, limited for now, but I feel that this will change in the next two to three years once ULSD is in place.
I have some questions about a 91 LS that a co-worker is selling that I'm interested in.
My email is in my profile.
GM, Ford & Toyota don't want diesels in the US unless they can racing them. If we did that then the HP race would be on again.
The price of fuel would come down if we had the same percentage of diesels as Europe.
http://www.americanlemans.com/News/Article.aspx?ID=1872
It's up to the North American manufacturers and oil companies to get their act together on diesel.
If we make stopping global warming the sine qua non of regulation, then we won't be having this argument, because we won't be allowed to drive cars, at all
switching to diesels from gassers may be significant from a short-term pocketbook perspective, but it isn't going to solve the global warming problem (IF we assume it is a problem)
I'm not saying it is or it isn't.
As to "using 30% more to lower emissions by one pound," I am guessing you don't have a family member with asthma. Does this mean that you are opposed to unleaded gas?
Some issues are public health issues, not economic issues. The toxicology of diesel emissions is well documented. It's not like this stuff is a secret. I'm not saying diesel doesn't have a role in our energy future - am just saying that having dirty diesels on the road is not in ANYONE's interest, except the driver who is thrilled that he is saving a few bucks.
Once the technology is there and the cleaner diesel is available, I am sure they will be legal in California.
Frankly, I'm not sure why Mass and New York care, since such a high % of their air pollution does not affect the local population (as it usually blows out to sea, compared to what happens in LA, San Francisco Bay, California's central valley). Maybe folks up in Newfie hired lobbyists to go to Albany and Boston.
The technology is available now. MB Blue Tech diesels pass CARB requirements.
Diesel creates fewer green house gasses than gas. It's the Nox and PM, but that should be greatly reduced with ULSD.
ULSD has been/is avalable for years/now AND in CA. So is biodiesel.
Well there is alway hydrogen. On a Honda Civic 22 mpg. Hydrogen @ 16 per gallon (weight) is a steal!!
but you make it all seem so simple!!!
:-)
It will be interesting to see how California deals with the movement that wants acceptance of biodiesel, in light of the regulatory bias against diesel
$16/gallon? I don't care about other people's asthma THAT much!! ;-)
Yeah I thought that would inject some reality into the discussion.
I think another .50 cents to 1.00 per gal more for unleaded regular as diesel declines by a like amount will turn the current inertia into a tsunami of public support.
Essentially at this juncture, the market has turn so called "econo box type" cars from an at invoice transaction to MSRP for a majority of the popular makes and models. I also was happy for Gagrice as he indicated he got the price he sought for his TDI and had BACK UP buyers with REAL MONEY in case the sight unseen buyer in first position decided NOT!!!
I think on a macro level there might be unintended consequences as China is projected to consume even more oil than the USA. They of course as you can see will consume it at much FASTER rates and at a much cheaper prices. So while we make our population suffer, (by higher costs) the flood gates will be WOT for China!!! It is well known that petro in Euro is at 6/7/8 (US) also it should not surprize anyone that Europe is in a state of arrested decay.
So for example in IRAN a gal of unleaded regular sells for .42 cents !!!!!!!!
So for example in IRAN a gal of unleaded regular sells for .42 cents !!!!!!!!
China allready own, or is partial owner or has major contracts for oil from every oil producing country except the USA. Of which they almost got a USA company but(fortunately) there was an uproar and that was stopped.
They know that they have only started to need fossil fuels and want to secure it in as many ways as possilbe, of which does include building up it's navy. While in the last 10 yrs the USA only build 1 sub while China build 16. Also, the quality is't half as the USA but with their new industrial might they will surely improve on that as well.
In England reg gas goes for $1.98/liter ($7.50/gal). something we still are fortunate for stil paying much less.
In Venesuela they only pay .04/liter (bout .16/gal).
And the USA is funding that commie who hates our guts, has done a major deal with China for oil.
The USA really needs to get it''s chit together before the chit really hits the fan one day and it surely will.
What I am saying is we are reaching the point of diminishing returns. The Holy grail of the environmentalist is zero emissions and zero GHG. It can be done. What most people do not realize is the amount of pollution going from a 1 to 10 on the EPA scale is a very small amount. If you have followed the EPA rating scale you would have noticed about a year ago they recalculated the scale, as many cars were in the top 8-10 rating. So they basically spread out the rating so a vehicle that was a 6 is now a 1 on the new scale. Basically if all the new vehicles were clean enough to not make much difference the EPA would be out of a job.
Going from ULEV to SULEV is almost undetectible. In fact the CA test stations for smog check cannot detect the difference. So the cars rated ULEV & SULEV are currently exempt. I took my Passat TDI into a station as I was curious about the emissions using ULSD. Guess what they have no way of testing a diesel engine at those places. So it is easier to ban them than to upgrade all their equipment. A friend at church worked in one of those places until he got fed up with the CA system. He told me that the tests were completely phoney and just another way to generate revenue. And yes my son in Alaska has asthma and he drives a diesel delivery truck. The only time he is bothered is down here during the spring and summer when the pollen and dust get to him.
I do hear ya re the emissions. Any diesel today is wayyy cleaner than many non-deisels of not that many years ago. (sorry for the lack of numbers)
I had thought that the ULSD was not as widely available as needed for the Calif. marketplace.
How did you become such an emissions geek? (intended as a compliment)
Taken as one.
I was curious why CA would allow big diesel PU trucks and not a much cleaner VW diesel. I found that CA and CARB are controlled not by science but special interest groups. I looked at the EPA site and determined through reading a lot of pages of boring stuff that we were chasing a mighty small amount of pollution over the last 15 years.
I was raised in Los Angeles. I remember when my chest would hurt and I could not breathe due to pollution. That horrible brown haze that hung over us most of the year. We moved to San Diego in 1958 and I did not feel that pain in my chest for several years. The fact that the EPA did a lot to clean up our air is a fact of life for me. I can appreciate making cars burn clean with clean unleaded gas. My question and others have asked the same thing. WHY has it taken 30 or more years to take the sulfur out of diesel fuel. We knew back then that it was bad stuff. Most of the pollution caused by diesel is directly related to sulfur. Much of the NoX is caused by trying to burn the sulfur out of diesel. It has been the special interests in the transportation sector, trucks, ships, heavy equipment & trains that have held us back on cleaning that part of the pollution out of our air. CARB & the EPA have blamed it on diesel cars to keep the environmentalists at bay. In the process we use 30% more oil than is needed to drive the miles we drive in this country. We have dumped 30% more GHG than has been necessary. All so the politicians can claim they are doing something for the environment.
I'll stop being so disagreeable toward you on these issues
I live in South Carolina and anything goes here. We obviously don't care about kids with breating problems. 20 year old school busses spew black smoke. Old cars with gas engines are riding around here spewing black smoke worse than my CRD does if I floor it.
Georgia has testing and as soon as you cross the border all the old smoking crap buckets disappear. So while the test may not be perfect, it better than what we have (nothing).
We don't even have vechile inspection anymore. If it rolls drive it no matter the shape. Who cares if there are no breaks, the windshield is cracked, it gets 100miles to a quart of oil, No hood, the suspension is crap, and there is a sticker in the back glass that read, "Aint Skert" or "Redneck". As long as it has working lights and insurance, drive it.
That is the other extreme. I think that a middle of the road sensible approach is what is needed. Your Liberty CRD would not smoke at all if you had good diesel. If you can find a BP station that sells diesel, try a tank full. It is higher cetane and a maximum of 30 PPM sulfur throughout the USA. In CA BP/ARCO only sells ULSD which is less than 15 PPM sulfur. We rarely see any car spewing smoke. If we do 9 times out of 10 it is an out of state or country vehicle. If EPA was doing the job they were given we would not have this disparity between states.
Buses are very expensive with all the new exhaust systems. Many school districts here have quit their bus programs. Or you have to pay for bus service for your children. There is no free bus service any more, that I know of. You are correct that old diesel buses put out a LOT of pollution. It would be better with ULSD, however the engines will need to be modified for the cleaner diesel. This is where all the hassle comes from on converting to ULSD. Many operators do not want to spend the money upgrading their engines for ULSD. Most modern diesel engines were developed on low sulfur diesel, such as your CRD. That is why all the EGR problems with our old crappy diesel.
I read all of this stuff about emmission control and enviromnetal concerns in california, and the first time i visited San Diego I expected to see all the people driving honda, and little euorpean mini cars. What a shock I recieved when I was greeted by huge suv's and pickups. I don't know where I was going with that.
My CRD doesn't really smoke. I was just trying to make a point.
Two things are involved. Los Angeles basin all the way to the San Bernardino Mtns get smog at times. Most has been traced back from the harbor at San Pedro/Long Beach. This is a major source of income and the ships burning everything from diesel to bunker oil sit there running while they are waiting to unload and load. There have been moves to give shore power that helps.
Second the head of CARB is a long time hater of diesel cars. I do understand he is softening his stance a bit. The restrictions that should have been dumped onto ships and trucks were instead aimed at cars. That way CARB could claim they are doing something about the pollution.
Georgia has testing and as soon as you cross the border all the old smoking crap buckets disappear. So while the test may not be perfect, it better than what we have (nothing).
We don't even have vechile inspection anymore. If it rolls drive it no matter the shape. Who cares if there are no breaks, the windshield is cracked, it gets 100miles to a quart of oil, No hood, the suspension is crap, and there is a sticker in the back glass that read, "Aint Skert" or "Redneck". As long as it has working lights and insurance, drive it."
There are no inspection programs in California either. Vechicles are checked for emissions only.
LA has special problems with SMOG that do not apply to most areas of the country. The LA basin was called "valley of the smokes" by the native populations, because the smoke from campfires stayed in the air. So vehicle emissions tend to stay in the air as well. The San Fernando valley at least often has a strong north wind to blow smog away.
I doubt that you really need the extra CARB requirements in South Carolina. And believe me, you don't want the extra 40 or so cents per gallon (sometimes 50 cents per gallon) required by the CARB "boutique" gas blends.
[I kid because I love]
WAR Sir Walter Raleigh!
Algae tested to fight warming, grow fuel
New York state, two partners will capture carbon dioxide, make biofuel
NEW YORK - How's this for a green idea: Remove carbon dioxide, a gas that many scientists tie to global warming, by having algae turn it into clean fuel?
It's actually more than an idea, and the state of New York along with independent power producer NRG Energy and GreenFuel Technologies will be testing the technology.
In a partnership announced Tuesday, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority is funding the project, which will test GreenFuel’s CO2 recycling technology at NRG's coal-fired power plant in Dunkirk, N.Y.
"This project has the potential to not only benefit the air quality in the surrounding community, but to also continue our progress toward producing clean renewable energy here in New York," NYSERDA President Peter Smith said in a statement.
Around 40 percent of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions come from fossil-fueled power plants.
GreenFuel will use a mini-bioreactor system to assess the technical and economic viability of its technology, which would use algae to consume CO2 emitted by the power plant. The algae could then be converted into biofuel, NRG said.
In a press release, the partners described the process this way: “In the presence of light, the single-celled algae take up CO2 to produce the energy that fuels plant life -- with a general rule of thumb being that two tons of algae remove one ton of CO2. Once the algae are harvested, they can be converted to generate commercially viable byproducts such as ethanol or biodiesel."
The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority will fund the study through the end of the year.
"Our key goals are, and have always been, to provide affordable, reliable and environmentally responsible energy. In that regard, doing our part to advance technological initiatives that may reduce CO2 emissions from our plants is a moral imperative," NRG President David Crane said in the statement.
GreenFuel said it expects its bioreactors will be able to be retrofitted to existing sources with minimal impact on existing generation operations.
12.05.06
By Errol Kiong
A New Zealand company has successfully turned sewage into modern-day gold.
Marlborough-based Aquaflow Bionomic yesterday announced it had produced its first sample of bio-diesel fuel from algae in sewage ponds.
It is believed to be the world's first commercial production of bio-diesel from "wild" algae outside the laboratory - and the company expects to be producing at the rate of at least one million litres of the fuel each year from Blenheim by April.
To date, algae-derived fuel has only been tested under controlled conditions with specially grown algae crops, said spokesman Barrie Leay.
Aquaflow's algae, however, were derived from excess pond discharge from the Marlborough District Council's sewage treatment works. Algae take most chemicals out of sewage, but having too many of them taints the water and produces a foul smell.
Creating fuel from the algae removes the problem while producing useful clean water, said Mr Leay. The clean water can then be used for stock food, irrigation and, if treated properly, for human consumption.
Mr Leay said the process could also benefit dairy farmers and food processors as the algae also thrive in those industries' waste streams.
And unlike some bio-fuel sources which require crops to be specially grown - using more land, fuel, chemicals and fertilisers - the algae already exist extensively.
To get the fuel, the algae are processed into a pulp before lipid oils are extracted to be turned into bio-diesel.
No. Biodiesel actually has the highest “energy balance” of any transportation fuel. The
DOE/USDA lifecycle analysis shows for every unit of fossil energy it takes to make
biodiesel, 3.2 units of energy are gained. This takes into account the planting,
harvesting, fuel production and fuel transportation to the end user.
http://www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/CommonlyAsked.PDF
3337A Emerald Ln.
P O Box 104898
Jefferson City, MO
65110-4898
(573) 635-3893 phone
(800) 841-5849
(573) 635-7913 fax
www.biodiesel.org
NEWS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contacts: Jenna Higgins / NBB
(573) 635-3893
Gene Hemphill/New Holland
(717) 355-1371
May 17, 2006
New Holland Becomes First Equipment Maker to Fully Approve B20
National Biodiesel Board Applauds Company’s Pioneering Move
(JEFFERSON CITY, Mo.) – Ed Hegland, a soybean grower in Appleton, Minn., has waited for
this news for years. The maker of his tractor, New Holland, has approved the use of 20 percent
biodiesel (B20) in all of its equipment using New Holland engines. It is the first Original
Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) to announce full support of B20 in all of the diesel engines that
it produces.
“I am elated that New Holland has taken this step to show support for biodiesel, a farmer-grown
fuel,” Hegland said. “Their customers asked for it, and they listened. I truly hope others will
follow suit soon.”
The National Biodiesel Board (NBB) applauded New Holland’s decision. “This is what we have
been working toward for years; a major equipment manufacturer announcing full support for use
of high quality B20 in all the diesel engines that they produce,” said Joe Jobe, CEO of NBB.
“Although other OEMs have taken positive steps toward B20, New Holland is the first to
specifically say that they approve the use of B20 in all of their engines. This powerful stand for
renewable energy is helping lead us toward a safer, less dependent nation.”
“Biodiesel is the future,” said Dennis D. Recker, Vice President of New Holland Agricultural
Business in North America. “As the availability of fossil fuels becomes a greater problem, we
need to look at alternatives. But they must also be cleaner, environmentally friendly alternatives.
New Holland is renowned for its innovation and forward-thinking approach, and we are
committed to bringing our customers the latest technology and the benefits it brings.”
NBB’s close work with New Holland and other OEMs was instrumental to the company’s
decision to support B20. During the past several years, NBB and the diesel engine, fuel
injection, and vehicle companies have engaged in extensive biodiesel research and testing
programs to develop an informed, fact-based position on the use of up to a 20 percent biodiesel
blend in diesel applications in the U.S.
(http://www.biodiesel.org/buyingbiodiesel/guide/B20_Fleet_Recommendations.pdf). The effort
was based on actual fleet experience with B20 in the commercial marketplace.
In addition, NBB and all the major vehicle, engine and fuel injection companies are engaged in a
research program for new diesel technology. The program tests B20 and lower blends in the
advanced diesel engine platforms mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
starting with 2007 model year vehicles.
“Our industry’s goal is for B20 approval in all major diesel engines and vehicles, and we are
making great strides towards that,” Jobe said.
All major OEMs support B5 and lower blends, provided they are made with biodiesel meeting
ASTM D 6751. A growing number are recommending the use of BQ-9000 companies. BQ-
9000 is NBB’s biodiesel industry quality program.
“While some companies might not fully recommend use of blends higher than B5 yet, we have
had virtually no problems with high quality B20—the type that would come from BQ-9000
approved companies. Use of blends higher than B5 will not necessarily void existing
warranties,” said Jobe.
Earlier this year, DaimlerChrysler broke new ground when it announced approval of the use of
B20 in its Dodge Ram pickup trucks for government, military and commercial fleet customers.
Use of B20 in fleets is approved effective with the 2007 Model Year.
New Holland has a track record of biodiesel support. In 2003, New Holland was the first large
farm equipment company to join the Biodiesel Alliance that connects the widespread support
base for biodiesel. The Biodiesel Alliance includes agricultural and health groups as well as
businesses. New Holland also awarded use of its tractors to the nation’s two top recruiters of the
Biodiesel Alliance.
Hegland, who also serves as chair of the NBB technical committee, has used various blends of
biodiesel in his ’98 tractor since he first brought it to the farm. “This is a leap forward for the
biodiesel industry, and the timing couldn’t be better,” he said. “Everyone is talking about energy
and how to increase our domestic supply. Biodiesel is one of the best things out there to help us
do that.”
Biodiesel is a renewable diesel fuel that is made from domestic resources such as soybean oil or
other domestic fats and vegetable oils. It can be used in any diesel engine with few or no
modifications, and can be blended with petroleum diesel at any level. Biodiesel significantly
cuts harmful environmental emissions, promotes greater energy independence and boosts our
economy. Today, more than 600 major fleets use biodiesel commercially, and 700 retail filling
stations make it available to the public.
# # #
Additional information about biodiesel is available online at www.biodiesel.org.
http://www.biodiesel.org/resources/pressreleases/far/20060517_new_holland_approv- es_b20nrfinal.pdf
========================================================
(JEFFERSON CITY, Mo.) – Sales of the Jeep® Liberty CRD diesel, which comes pre-filled
with 5 percent biodiesel (B5), are about to surpass the 10,000 mark. That’s double the number
expected when Chrysler Group first launched the diesel model in early 2005.
===================================================
Biodiesel is a cleaner burning, renewable alternative fuel that can be made from any fat or
vegetable oil, such as soybean oil. The market surplus in soybean oil from one bushel of
soybeans makes 1.4 gallons of biodiesel, offering up a lucrative new market for America’s
farmers without detracting from the nation’s food supply.
=======================================================
Biodiesel has become America’s fastest growing alternative fuel according to the Department of
Energy. More than 600 retail filling stations make biodiesel available to the public, and 1,500
petroleum distributors carry it nationwide. More than 600 major fleets now use biodiesel,
including government and military, commercial and school bus fleets.
http://www.biodiesel.org/resources/pressreleases/gen/20060322_jeep_ag_day.pdf
Energy.
We use a lot of diesel each year for trucks, trains, buses, ships & heating. Biodiesel is a much simpler solution than ethanol. It can be dumped into the pipeline stream in any mixture. It is so simple to make from so many different sources. It probably scares the big corporations like ADM, as they cannot control it like they can ethanol. Algae seems to be gaining ground from several fronts. Animal rendering is a source. Used cooking oil is probably the widest used product from the single vehicle user to major companies. My favorite Potato Chip maker Kettle Chips has a fleet of VW Beetle TDIs that run on B100 from their own used cooking oil.
I suspect that grassroots entrepreneurs will solve the energy problems, not our worthless government.
Unfortunately, I think you're right.
Nothing like gud ole entrepreneurs to take the lead, God bless them all.
Amen to that, gagrice!!
Actually you might persuade the local, national authorities to hinder development, production, transport of this competing product. OTOH if a far-sighted management of such a company saw the end of readily available dino-fuel in the intermediate term getting in on the ground floor is the strategy to follow.
I think for the next 20 yrs we will still have to buy all our B100 from Willie and others.
I think Willie's enterprise is grass roots. He is very small potatoes in the energy business. I noticed that Shell has bought a big interest in Iogen, the company that has the best chance at producing ethanol from biomass, such as switchgrass. It will take big investors like the oil companies to build those huge processing plants. The government will only muddle things up by getting involved. If there is money to be made let business get the job done. There is plenty of money for good business venture prospects. What is a better investment than energy?
I think the oil companies are way ahead of us on such ventures. When BP bought ARCO they got one of the largest manufacturers of solar panels. ARCO was an early investor in that field, that is just now starting to make a little money. The problem has been cheap oil. Remember the shale oil projects that went bust in the 1980s. It could happen again in Canada. Ethanol in Brazil went bust in the 1980s when oil prices came back to earth. Sugar was more valuable than ethanol. The billions of tax dollars we are dumping into ADM pockets as we type, could all go up in vapor. The Ethanol plants are only money makers with very high priced oil and big subsidies. What will happen to biodiesel prices when Exxon turns on the valves to their 8 billion dollar natural gas to diesel venture in Qatar? They claim that Qatar with the world's largest known reserves of natural gas could supply a lot of ultra low sulfur diesel for the next couple hundred years. Could be why we have such a large military presence in Qatar.
The lobby groups can't agree to just push BD they want to push the feed stock. The soy growers what it to be from soy beans and bash anyother method (the National biodeisel board was once the nation soy diesel board if you don't believe me look it up). It is just now that they have started to unite there efforts. Hince the name change at the NBB and publication of other feed stocks on there web page.
The enthonal lobbiests if nothing else have there act together. I mean look at ethonal. E85 is becoming more and more popular even though it costs more and the cars get worst fuel effeciency :confuse:. Why GM has gotten on the E85 kick is beyond me, they haven't done anything progressive ever. They are the reason that people in this contry dislike diesel so much but that is another conversation. If the BD people got there stuff together the way that the ethonal people have BD would be much more popular. There problem is also two fold they are not just pushing BD they also have to convence the public the deisel in general can be environmentaly friendly.
My boss gets never want to ride with me to lunch because he thinks that my jeep is going to smell like a big rig diesel truck. I made him follow me one day and tell me if he could smell any diesel and of course he couldn't, but this is the image problem the the BD folk have to deal with.
Sorry if that was rambling.
Even the informed here at Edmund's still think that the major users of biodiesel get their fix from the back door of McDonald's. Then keep it in barrels in the garage. There is that contingency and they are driving around with a big smile on their faces and the sweet smell of french fries emanting from their exhaust. It can be done for pennies per gallon with NO tax. If I was not so lazy I would join their ranks.
The first profitable biodiesel venture I know of is in Maui. Pacific Biodiesel started out as a homegrown way to use the 40 tons of wasted oil being dumped into the landfill each month. They are the people that got Willie Nelson involved as they sold him and others in his commune biodiesel. I am going to buy another diesel vehicle. Probably one out of warranty so I don't worry about voiding it, and start using Willie B20 that is available in San Diego. I will get a 100 gallon tank and set up for my Kubota tractor and whatever other vehicles I buy. It may be one of these.
The limited-edition “Willie's Willys” pickup was unveiled yesterday at the 2006 National Biodiesel Conference at the San Diego Convention Center.
Bio Willie
They know that qatar has lots of natural gas but it's still fossil fuel.
The USA would keep any military in any country that sells fossil fuels because as Dubba said, "America is adiccted to oil". However, most countries decline USA directly in thier country. Of which Qatar is a very small country and very small military and needs to feel secure in their accests and will take the political fallout to let the USA military stay there, as they have said on TV.